IN-HOUSE VS OUTSOURCING

Because of the many "hats" that in-house collection departments are required to wear, Kross, Lieberman, & Stone has found
in-house collections alone are not as successful as they would hope to be. Many companies have even hired trained
collectors who are still not completely successful. Unfortunately, regardless of the trained staff that companies
may maintain or the extreme effort collection managers put forth, there are still debtors that will not pay without
third party intervention.

INTERVENTION GETS RESULTS

Our job may be simple in these cases. An introduction and a demand for payment in full may be all our company has to do.
The debtor now knows our client means business and will make payment. Kross, Lieberman & Stone finds it useful
when a company has had someone working specifically at collecting past dues. This in-house collections department
knows its debtors and their excuses. Kross, Lieberman & Stone has worked in conjunction with many in-house
collections departments and has found our mutual efforts to be successful.

As a rule Kross, Lieberman & Stone recommends that a company never choose in-house collections as the last resort. Often
creditors and debtors can become so involved emotionally that a debt can not be approached rationally. In this
case and in many scenarios, outsourcing your accounts is as important as an in-house collection system.